Legislature(2003 - 2004)
02/18/2004 01:34 PM CRA
* first hearing in first committee of referral
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE SENATE COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE February 18, 2004 1:34 p.m. TAPE (S) 04-5 MEMBERS PRESENT Senator Bert Stedman, Chair Senator Thomas Wagoner, Vice Chair Senator Gary Stevens Senator Kim Elton Senator Georgianna Lincoln MEMBERS ABSENT All members present COMMITTEE CALENDAR SENATE BILL NO. 227 "An Act relating to municipal initiative and referendum elections." MOVED SB 227 OUT OF COMMITTEE SENATE BILL NO. 269 "An Act relating to access to the library records of a child by a parent or guardian." MOVED CSSB 269(CRA) OUT OF COMMITTEE PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION BILL: SB 227 SHORT TITLE: MUNI INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM ELECTIONS SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) STEVENS G 05/15/03 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS 05/15/03 (S) CRA, STA 02/18/04 (S) CRA AT 1:30 PM FAHRENKAMP 203 BILL: SB 269 SHORT TITLE: PARENT ACCESS TO CHILD'S LIBRARY RECORDS SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) GREEN 01/16/04 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS 01/16/04 (S) CRA, HES 02/11/04 (S) CRA AT 1:30 PM FAHRENKAMP 203 02/11/04 (S) Heard & Held 02/11/04 (S) MINUTE(CRA) 02/18/04 (S) CRA AT 1:30 PM FAHRENKAMP 203 WITNESS REGISTER Linda Murphy, Clerk Kenai Peninsula Borough 144 North Binkley Street Soldotna, AK 99669 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 227 POSITION STATEMENT: Lyda Green Alaska State Capitol Juneau, AK 99801-1182 POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor SB 269 Jacqueline Tupou Aide to Senator Lyda Green Alaska State Capitol Juneau, AK 99801-1182 POSITION STATEMENT: Explained provisions of SB 269 Lynne Shepherd Representative, Alaska Library Association P.O. Box 81804 Fairbanks, AK 99708 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 269 June Pinnell-Stephens Alaska Civil Liberties Union Fairbanks, Alaska 99707 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 269 Andree McLeod No address provided POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 269 George Smith Acting Director Libraries, Archives & Museums Department of Education & Early Development P.O. Box 110571 Juneau, AK 99801-0571 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 269 ACTION NARRATIVE TAPE 04-5, SIDE A CHAIR BERT STEDMAN called the Senate Community and Regional Affairs Standing Committee meeting to order at 1:34 p.m. Present were Senators Wagoner, Gary Stevens, Lincoln, Elton and Chair Stedman. SB 227-MUNI INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM ELECTIONS CHAIR BERT STEDMAN announced SB 227 to be up for consideration and asked Senator Gary Stevens to introduce his bill. SENATOR GARY STEVENS paraphrased the sponsor statement: SB 227 was introduced specifically to help local governments avoid costly special initiative elections and referendums brought forward by voters. In many cases, these measures are not so pressing in nature that they could not wait for the regular municipal election. Special elections are costly and generally result in a lower voter turnout than the regular election. Recently, the Fairbanks North Star Borough had over 46 petitions filed in a period of 4 months. Although these petitions resulted in only one special election - at a cost of $35,000 -, there was a potential for many more special elections at great cost to the municipality. This bill could result in cost savings to municipalities that could choose to wait until the next regular election, typically in October, to consider an issue. This legislation would give the municipal governing body the option of calling a special election if the council or assembly wished to have the initiative and referendum considered in a more timely manner. The Alaska Municipal League, the Fairbanks North Star Borough, the Kenai Peninsula Borough, and the Alaska Association of Municipal Clerks support this bill. SENATOR KIM ELTON said he read the bill and didn't see the provision that gave municipalities the option to hold a special election and wondered whether that is in another provision of law that isn't covered in the bill. SENATOR GARY STEVENS said that is correct, they already have the option to hold a special election and this allows them to postpone the election if they believe that is prudent. SENATOR GEORGIANNA LINCOLN reviewed the letters in support of the issue and asked whether Anchorage had responded. SENATOR GARY STEVENS said they didn't solicit a comment from Anchorage and didn't receive one. SENATOR LINCOLN asked if they solicited a response from Fairbanks. SENATOR GARY STEVENS conceded they had not. The request came from the clerk's association and they received the letters of support without solicitation. CHAIR STEDMAN opened the hearing to public participation. LINDA MURPHY, clerk of the Kenai Peninsula Borough, testified via teleconference and advised that she has administered local elections for more than 20 years. To address Senator Lincoln's question, she explained that in Title 29 this provision isn't a home rule limitation so Anchorage wouldn't be affected because it is a home rule municipality. With increasing competition for decreasing funds, many municipalities are facing grave financial difficulties and can't afford unbudgeted special elections, she said. The most important point is that special elections attract very few voters, which increases the likelihood that the election results won't reflect the true will of the community. She encouraged members to pass the bill. SENATOR GARY STEVENS asked her to respond to Senator Elton's question about municipalities' ability to call special elections if they choose to do so. MS. MURPHY explained that Alaska Statutes provide that the governing body may call special elections any time as long as they properly notice the election. She saw nothing in SB 227 that would affect that ability. CHAIR STEDMAN noted there was no further testimony. He asked for a motion. SENATOR THOMAS WAGONER motioned to pass SB 227 from committee with individual recommendations and attached zero fiscal note. There being no objection, it was so ordered. CHAIR STEDMAN called a brief at-ease. SB 269-PARENT ACCESS TO CHILD'S LIBRARY RECORDS CHAIR BERT STEDMAN reconvened the meeting and announced SB 269 to be up for consideration. The bill was previously heard and relates to parental access to children's library records. He noted there was a committee substitute (CS) and asked for a motion to adopt it as the working document. SENATOR THOMAN WAGONER made a motion to adopt the CS for SB 269, \I version, as the working document. SENATOR GEORGIANNA LINCOLN objected for discussion purposes. CHAIR STEDMAN asked the sponsor to explain the changes. SENATOR LYDA GREEN, sponsor of SB 269, said Jacqueline Tupou had done most of the research on the bill and she could better explain the changes. JACQUELINE TUPOU, staff to Senator Green, referenced the discussion at the last meeting regarding age limit for parental access and said she found out more about FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. She read from the U.S. Department of Education web site: FERPA gives parents certain rights with respect to their children's education record. These rights transfer to the student when he or she reaches the age of 18 or attends a school beyond the high school level. In addition to that, there is a provision in statute that says: No funds under any applicable program shall be made available to any state agency that has a policy of denying, or effectively prevents, the parents of students the right to inspect and review the education records maintained by the state agency on their children who have been attendants in any school or educational agency or institution that is subject to the provision of this section. Federal law clearly says that parents have the right of access until the child reaches 18, and also denies federal funding for education programs and institutions such as libraries for noncompliance. MS. TUPOU said they drew up a CS relating to age limit after learning about those two points. Page 1, line 13 identifies a child under 18 years of age. CHAIR STEDMAN asked Senator Lincoln if the explanation was sufficient. SENATOR LINCOLN withdrew her objection to adopting the CS as the working document, but advised that she had questions on the bill. SENATOR ELTON wanted clarification before the CS was adopted. He noted that the quote from FERPA referred to state educational agencies and asked whether that would mean a school district or the Department of Education. MS. TUPOU replied she discussed that point with legislative legal and "they have decided that this would apply to the legislation that you currently have before you and that's why we've made this change accordingly." SENATOR ELTON wasn't sure he understood her answer and asked if a school district is a state education agency that the FERPA language would apply to or would it apply only to a state education agency such as the Department of Education. MS. TUPOU said her understanding is that it does apply to school districts and "those people that are receiving federal monies for their education program." SENATOR ELTON followed up by asking if this applies to the state library as well since it is a part of the Department of Education. MS. TUPOU reread the statutory provision, "any school or educational agency or institution" and said she understands that to mean that the term "institution" would apply to the state library. SENATOR GARY STEVENS interpreted the language as reference to educational records and not library books and asked if he was missing the point. He asked her to comment on whether educational records would include checking out library books. MS. TUPOU said SB 269 speaks to the statute that talks about public records. In addition to the special provisions that say that libraries will be private, there is also a special provision that says where parental access is allowed for those private records. "That's what we're talking about currently here today is the records themselves," she said. SENATOR GARY STEVENS asked whether libraries actually keep records of who checks out a particular book. MS. TUPOU replied that point isn't addressed in the legislation. The state archivist could answer the question about the schedule for retention of records. SENATOR GARY STEVENS said he was asking whether those records are kept at all. MS. TUPOU said she understands that records are kept for three years at the state library and there is a suggested schedule for local governments. Also, certain municipalities have their own schedule for record retention so it varies. She maintained the bill doesn't address that so she hadn't researched it further. SENATOR LINCOLN said she needed to ask the same question in another way because the bill talks about library records and the quote refers to educational records. She questioned how educational records relate to library records. MS. TUPOU said, "Our legislation specifically makes provisions for including public libraries as well as public school libraries." She made the point that legislative legal holds that it could be construed to mean all libraries and even if it is applicable to just public school libraries, SB 269 levels the playing field and makes it clear that all libraries are included. SENATOR GARY STEVENS confessed he needed more specific clarification on what they were trying to correct. He asked whether they were trying to make it possible for parents to pick up library books for their children as someone testified or were they trying to correct another issue. SENATOR GREEN reviewed the discussion from the previous hearing. She introduced the legislation because two friends of hers were unable to get information on their child's library records. One issue related to an overdue book and the other was about a book on hold. In the second instance, the librarian wouldn't tell the parent the title of the book their child had on hold. She asserted it is an outrageous that a parent isn't able to access their child's library records when the parent is ultimately responsible for the books their child checks out or the fines they incur. She assured members she was not delving in the areas of confidentiality rights or censorship. She simply wants parents to have access to their child's public library records just as they already have to their child's public school library records. CHAIR STEDMAN noted for the record that the \I version CS was the working document before the committee. SENATOR ELTON asked if the parent in the second instance was able to pick up the book. SENATOR GREEN replied the parent had to take the child with them. SENATOR ELTON smiled and said he was reluctant to ask the conservative question, but this appeared to be a large paradigm shift. Why would we want to do this, he questioned. This would be a state mandate to community and nonprofit libraries telling them how they must operate. Why shouldn't communities make their own decisions and rules on this type of issue, he asked. SENATOR GREEN laughed and replied she assumes that many people believe that the original statutory language included all libraries. MS. TUPOU opined the conservative question is the reverse. Why does state law dictate to public libraries that they can't let parents access their children's records? SENATOR ELTON admitted he was puzzled. Clearly, he said, AS 40.25.140(b) applies to public elementary and secondary schools, but right now a local assembly or council may craft rules to apply to their municipal libraries. This would take away that ability so he couldn't understand the claim that SB 269 would give municipal libraries more latitude. MS. TUPOU said section 1 (a) talks about library records being confidential. She continued, "Unless we make an exemption in statute, those aren't confidential records so we had to dictate to the library what their policy will be." SENATOR LINCOLN told Senator Green that after she left the hearing last week, someone from the Alaska Library Association testified that the issue of child abuse is a reason for not giving a parent access to a child's records. She asked the sponsor to respond to the claim that an abused child might be subjected to further harm if an abusing parent learned that the child was seeking information and help. SENATOR GREEN replied, " The issue of confidentiality of records of children is far broader than library information and different agencies handle it differently.... This seems to be so confined an issue I do not see that as being germane to what we're talking about." SENATOR GARY STEVENS said he thought he understood what the sponsor was trying to accomplish, but he was still concerned about the age issue. He reflected that as a retired college professor, he had a number of 18-year-old high school students who took his classes and this legislation could include them. He opined they might be overreaching when they include 18-year- olds. SENATOR GREEN replied she didn't establish an age initially; it is FERPA that set the age of 18 and under. She said, "It really wouldn't matter whether or not we pass this. Their requirement is a federal law." SENATOR ELTON followed up on Senator Gary Steven's question and said FERPA applies only to school libraries and he didn't believe it was necessarily appropriate to apply FERPA provisions to public libraries when FERPA only applies to libraries of educational institutions. SENATOR GREEN told him that was his judgment and their decision was to use under 18 years of age. SENATOR ELTON asked if there is any provision in state law that prohibits a child from waiving confidentiality to their library records. SENATOR GREEN thought that was mentioned in FERPA. MS. TUPOU explained that FERPA says that parents have access to their child's records. SENATOR ELTON said he understands how FERPA applies and whom it applies to. FERPA doesn't apply to a public library he stated emphatically. Again, he asked whether any provision of law prohibits a child from waiving their confidentiality rights at a public library. MS. TUPOU replied that is a technical legal question and they would have to consult legislative legal for the answer. SENATOR ELTON asked whether someone from the library association would provide testimony. CHAIR STEDMAN said he was planning on that. MS. TUPOU added that when they gave legislative legal some anecdotal stories about policies around the state, they were told that libraries that have chosen to give out children's records are noncompliant with state law. CHAIR STEDMAN called Lynn Shepherd to testify. LYNN SHEPHERD, government relations chair for the Alaska Library Association (AkLA), read from her prepared testimony: It appears that the proposed amendment to AS 40.25.140 is intended to solve two problems: · Parents needing to pay fines for materials checked out by their children but not being aware of the items on loan · Parents wanting to pick up library materials for their children who cannot be present at the time of checkout Last week, AkLA presented reasons for opposing the proposed wording of the amendment. We have examined the statutes of 49 states with regard to the confidentiality of library records. Only 8 states allow parental inspection of both school and public library records of their minor children: AL LA UT GA WV OH WY SD Just 1 state, in addition to AK, allows parental inspection of school library records of minor children. NM 40 states protect the confidentiality of library records for all users except: 23 states specify that a library patron may give permission for the release of his/her records 6 states specify that a library may make public the information pertaining to overdue materials and 10 others specify such records may be disclosed "for the orderly management of the library" - probably referring to the status of overdue, lost, and damaged materials In only 2 states, do the statutes specifically include academic and state libraries with parental rights. In summary, approximately 85 percent of states provide for the confidentiality of the library records of minors. And some of these (e.g. SC, AR) even specify that school library records are included among those records that are protected. AkLA leadership has discussed the various issues involved - parental rights, children's rights, library staff rights, and public property protection. MS. SHEPHERD said the association has several suggestions to clarify the issue while still protecting the rights of children. They believe that library records related to overdue, lost, and damaged library materials should be available to parents provided that the child's personal identifying information is not released. She observed that is how educational records and Department of Transportation records are handled in Alaska Statutes. Also, reserved library material for children under 16 years of age should be released to a parent or guardian provided that the child gives signed written consent at the time the materials are released. She said the association believes that this solves several problems. It would permit parents to keep track of and pick up material their child checks out; it would protect minors who are responsible borrowers and who want or need privacy regarding library material they use; it would protect personal identifying information that can be in a library record; it would protect library staff who would have written proof of authorization to release information to a parent. The association also recommends eliminating mention of the state and the University of Alaska libraries in section 2 (c). She said she has an interpretation of FERPA that says, "the permission or consent required of and the right supported to the parents of the student shall, thereafter only be required of and accorded to the student attending that institution of postsecondary education. Their reading of FERPA is that although there are some exceptions, the student must always give their written consent. SENATOR LINCOLN asked who belongs to the Alaska Library Association. MS. SHEPHERD replied the membership consists of professional librarians, library administrators, library staff and library trustees for all types of libraries. SENATOR LINCOLN asked why they suggest eliminating reference to state and university libraries. MS. SHEPHERD said it is the conflict with FERPA and she isn't sure that the records of a university student would be accessible in any case without written consent. SENATOR LINCOLN asked if the association worked with the sponsor to craft a proposed amendment. MS. SHEPHERD spoke of tight schedules. SENATOR WAGONER commented that the problem he has with dropping reference to the university library is that in the Kenai area there is a multiple use arrangement between the school libraries, the municipal library and the university library to make better use of limited resources. SENATOR ELTON observed that they heard testimony that alleged that under FERPA you are denied federal funds if you don't provide access to educational records. MS. SHEPHERD said she didn't have a copy of their interpretation of FERPA in front of her, but it is just the reverse of that statement. She advised the association's reading is that, "A parent does not have access and if that is violated, then the institution doesn't get funding." SENATOR ELTON referred to FERPA, section 1232g (B) and read, No funds under any applicable program shall be made available to and state educational agency (whether or not that agency is an educational agency or institution under this section) that has a policy of denying, or effectively prevents, the parents of students the right to inspect and review the education records... He then compared that section of FERPA with the library association handout that says 40 states protect the confidentiality of library records for all users. He commented that the data is confusing, but it seems as though 40 states are not compliant with FERPA. SIDE B 2:22 pm SENATOR ELTON continued to say that he was uncomfortable with what the committee was told about the application of FERPA if, in fact, 40 states are out of compliance. CHAIR STEDMAN called on June Pinnell-Stephens to give testimony. JUNE PINNELL-STEPHENS, Alaska Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) past president and current board member, testified via teleconference from Fairbanks. She told the committee, "I do not support this amendment to confidentiality of library records." She made the point that parents are responsible for their children's use and abuse of library materials whether or not they agree with them or even know about them. Also, once a library card is issued, anyone who has the card can use it and it's not uncommon for parents to do so. She asserted that the library records could be released under the proposed amendment and information might be divulged to a divorced spouse that may or may not have custody of the child. MS. PINNELL-STEPHENS said that most libraries send notices to alert users that they have overdue material and those notices provide parents sufficient information to track down their children's material. She stated that there are two possible reasons for the bill. First is to help parents avoid minor inconvenience associated with handling their children's library transactions. Twenty- three other states provide a solution to that issue by allowing any user to authorize release of their records and the ACLU would support such an amendment. The second reason for the bill is to help parents control the books their children read. The right to privacy is guaranteed under the state constitution and is the basis for the confidentiality statute, she asserted. That right is not restricted by age. Furthermore, without the guarantee of privacy and confidentiality, there can be no freedom of inquiry. She encouraged parents to guide their own children in the use of the library, but made the point that children should be able to use the library without fear of punishment. In conclusion, she urged the committee to support the constitutional right to privacy as represented in the original law. CHAIR STEDMAN thanked Ms. Pinnell-Stephens for her testimony then called Andrea McLeod to testify. ANDREA McLEOD testified via teleconference from Anchorage. She reported that she is the parent of a 21 year old and she fully supports SB 269. She stated that she was appalled to learn about the two instances that precipitated the bill and charged that it is acrimonious public policy that is adversarial to parents with children under 18 years of age. "Parents are legally and absolutely responsible for their children until they reach 18 - the age of majority. At the very least, parents do not need any publicly funded librarian encroaching on their inherent and absolute parental rights," she said. CHAIR STEDMAN thanked Ms. McLeod and brought the discussion back before the committee. SENATOR ELTON asked whether the state library director would answer a few questions. GEORGE SMITH, acting director or the Division of Libraries, Archives & Museums, sat down and said he would entertain questions. SENATOR ELTON asked whether he had read the FERPA material. MR. SMITH said FERPA isn't relevant in his work and he didn't consider himself to be an expert on that federal legislation. He added that he too was perplexed because the information presented leads to the conclusion that either 40 states are out of compliance or FERPA doesn't apply to a library. "It's got to be one or the other," he said. SENATOR ELTON remarked that he might be inferring too much, but he assumes that the provisions of FERPA have never been applied to state libraries. MR. SMITH said that is correct and added, "I think it's strictly within the educational environment and in this case, the state library would not be included even though we are in a department of education. Not all state libraries are in the Department of Education [and Early Development]." SENATOR LINCOLN asked if he had ever denied a parent access to records. MR. SMITH explained he has been in state libraries most of his career. Twice he was director of a public library and once he was director of an academic library and he said, "Personally I am surprised that a public library director - and I'm assuming these were public library directors in Alaska - denied a parent access to the child's records when the child gave permission. " He continued to say that he might have broken the law, but he probably would have given the parent the information. He said he finds it interesting that 23 states specifically address authorizing the release of patron's library records in their confidentiality law. "It's clear that half our states see this as problematic if you don't address it directly in the law," he argued. The other issue is what happens when library materials are overdue and a parent is unable to access the records. He noted that, "either directly or indirectly a third of our states do address that in their law in that they do release that information to the parent." Also, he knew of several instances in Alaska where a public library received legal advice that if a child has overdue library material they have broken their contract with the library and it's acceptable for the library to release the information to the parent. SENATOR LINCOLN stated she wants to protect a child that has been abused and who doesn't want a parent to have access to their records, but she also wants to protect parental rights. Having said that, she made the that point that an abused child would probably sign any permission slip their parent told them to sign whether they wanted that parent to have access or not. MR. SMITH acknowledged that is an unfortunate but probably accurate observation. Sadly, he didn't know of a way to legally address that situation. SENATOR WAGONER asked whether it isn't the parent who is ultimately responsible for paying library fines. MR. SMITH said his understanding is that the parent is financially responsible until the child reaches majority and that is age 18 in Alaska and he thought it would be very appropriate to address that in law. SENATOR WAGONER opined it is a stretch to think that an abused child would turn to the library when looking for answers. Child abuse is beyond what this legislation is trying to correct, he said. SENATOR GARY STEVENS noted that a child can use library material without checking anything out and that is never a part of any record. He remarked that having raised three children he has paid a small fortune in overdue library books. However, his library sends postcard notices advising patrons when they have overdue materials so he knows exactly which books are overdue. MR. SMITH said different libraries have different ways of notifying patrons of overdue materials. SENATOR ELTON read section 1 (a) of the bill and stated that it seems to prohibit libraries from releasing information identifying a patron, but it doesn't prohibit releasing information about what that patron is reading. He asked whether any other provision of law prohibits releasing information such as the title of a book. MR. SMITH said no, this is the only statute that addresses library records. He thought that was an interesting way to read the law, but didn't disagree with the interpretation. Having read the confidentiality laws for all 50 states he explained that most states include library material itself as being an identifying part of the record. SENATOR ELTON remarked that he believes it would be difficult to construe that his checking out a book on Darwin would be personally identifying information because lots of people check out books on Darwin. MR. SMITH agreed with that statement. SENATOR ELTON stated that until the question regarding his reading of section 1 (a) is answered, the bill might not be necessary because there may be no prohibition against releasing titles to parents. MR. SMITH explained he arrived in Alaska shortly after the law was passed in 1985 and he has been the one who interpreted the law for school and public libraries over the years. He maintained that it has always been assumed that library materials are considered part of the record. He conceded that the statute might not have been written properly, but the intent is that books that patrons check are part of the record. CHAIR STEDMAN closed public testimony and asked for a motion. SENATOR WAGONER made a motion to move \I version, CSSB 269 (CRA) from committee with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal note. SENATOR ELTON objected and said: Aside from the point that the bill may not be necessary, I think that we're trying to take a very broad approach to solve two relatively discrete situations and I'm not clear in my mind whether we need a change in law to do that or if in fact libraries have the ability to ask of any patron that they waive their confidentiality to the materials that are being checked out of the library. I'm sympathetic to the notion that people, especially families, ought to have some control over the materials that young people have access to. Having said that, I think there are many situations that when we try to apply the broad scope of law to ensure that that happens there are many situations that are caught up and that create real problems within a family. The Senator from Rampart has mentioned some of those. It also seems to me that what we may be doing is trying to fix a problem that really doesn't get to the root of it. Right now, young people can go on the computer and get access to any kind of information they want with no ability for a parent or a family member to find out what kind of information they're accessing. I tend to think that when you have information that is available through libraries that are run by professional librarians, that we ought to give them the latitude, under existing law, to make decisions that best works for them, best works for the patrons and best works for the communities in which they are operating rather than having relatively broad prohibitions that are established at the state level. For all of those reasons, Mr. Chair, I'm going to vote no. CHAIR STEDMAN asked whether there were any other comments. SENATOR GARY STEVENS asked where the bill would go after leaving this committee. CHAIR STEDMAN replied it would go to the Health Education and Social Services Committee next. CHAIR STEDMAN called for a roll call vote. The motion to move \I version, CSSB 269 (CRA) from committee passed with Senators Elton and Lincoln voting no and Senators Wagoner, Gary Stevens, and Chair Stedman voting yes. CHAIR STEDMAN announced that he would hold committee meetings on just Wednesday of each week unless the workload dictated otherwise. He then adjourned the meeting at 2:45 pm.